An essay analyzing how fear after the nuclear accident enabled a flawed narrative equating anti-nuclear sentiment with the dismantling of power companies and electricity liberalization. It exposes how a critical logical leap went unnoticed by the public.

2016-03-24
This is a continuation of the previous chapter.
Mr. Iida explained to citizens frightened by the nuclear accident that nuclear power plants existed because electric power companies operated under a cost-plus pricing system that allowed them to add costs freely, and therefore they wanted expensive nuclear plants.
He went on to argue that since these power companies had long indulged in the sweet profits of regional monopolies, their vested interests should be stripped away through electricity liberalization.
From there, the conclusion presented was that “anti-nuclear power cannot be achieved unless power companies such as TEPCO are dismantled and generation and transmission are separated.”
At that time—and even now—criticism of TEPCO was unrestricted due in part to its own failings, and no one noticed the logical leap equating anti-nuclear power with the dismantling of TEPCO and electricity liberalization.
To be continued.